Full Video: Explosions Before Both WTC Collapses and before WTC7 Collapse - You Will Believe

Originally posted by AgentSmith
It's not the first time I've heard that and it's an avenue I rarely see being explored for some reason.

The 'Government' is too large and complex to be considered as a whole, besides it's a pretty good system if it was used properly. Individuals and small groups should be considered and when thinking about implementation one should consider methods where normal people in official standing doing their normal routines could unwittingly play a part. To think that hundreds would be involved is foolhardy. The majority of people in power and carrying out tasks are probably as oblivious as every other.
The operatives on that day may very well have had religous extremism as their primary motivation, but it doesn't mean the organisation behind the funding, training and planning do.

people live in reality bubbles. you can get good people to do things for the wrong reasons, though, for sure. i agree.
it could be true that there is a great deal of the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing, through compartmentalisation, and people who were used in the operations would not necessarily know the bigger truth. secret service people, for example, take orders from above, no questions asked. the corporate chain of command is the same.
like, simply ordering the bomb sniffing dogs out, and simply shutting off the power for a weekend.
i've worked security in towers, before, and there is plenty of time and anonomity in the wee hours. certain offices run 24 hrs. a day, but the employees stay on their own floors. the majority of a tower is empty every night, except for cleaners and security guards.
the orders come from the top, though. there is only a handful of people to blame, and there are many people involved that were definitely not muslim.

[edit on 14-2-2006 by billybob]

As far as good people doing bad things I would say that everyone does the 'right' thing given his/her global perspective. The murderer always believes the victim deserves it. Always. The Bush administration is the ultimate 'ends justify the means' group. The hyperbole employed to justify their abandonment of the rule of law where it conflicts with activities they believe will achieve their ends illustrates their abandonment of both logic and respect for legal precedent from national to international law and treaty obligations. This can only lead to chaos, as we have seen.

This is because, as we know, democracy cannot be sustained without a knowledgable citizenry. The leadership's decision to hide the truth from the masses on so many fronts gives rise to a break-down in the mechanics of democracy. Their excuse is that the information - all information - is a matter of national security and cannot be disclosed. But their true motivation is self-preservation and perpetuation of power. They also disregard the theory that democracy is, by its very nature, an ongoing experiment in revolution with each election an opportunity for the people to 'throw the bums out.'

A neocon apologist could score points by arguing that a full disclosure of those involved in 9-11 and how it happened (such as by ungagging FBI translator Sibel Edmonds) would undermine national security by undermining public faith in government. This is similar to the use of police powers to temporarily withhold constitutional rights on the local level. Thus the Nazis were legally denied their First Amendment rights when prevented from marching in Skokie (44% Jewish - highest percentage of Holocaust survivors in US) back in 1975. The denial was accomplished when the JDL showed up ready to kick some Nazi ass and the cops shut the march down. But the Supreme Court endorsed the Nazi right to march. Police power shut it down.

I am more a reader than a poster here, but the dialogue is important since the media is mostly unreliable. Together we create our own media. The criticism of what is posted is just as important as the ideas expressed. Thesis + antithesis = synthesis.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Fine, there were probably explosives. Who cares if a little bad science is used to promote the idea anyway, as long as the end is the same and everyone comes to the right conclusion it really doesn't matter. It's fine to push an agenda on false ideas as long as it benefits everyone in the end.

So now we know it was done with explosives and we can all agree on it, what do people suggest the next step is? Are we going to sit around talking about how it was done or something? Shouldn't we be doing something?

img118.imageshack.us...

I am working on this footage and all others. There are many flashes that
show up as the tower is collapsing but they are so quick they are hard to capture with my current software. The duration of these flashes is 1-3 frames of the video. Very fast.

[edit on 14-2-2006 by count zero]

Why has no one posted a comment on these falashes?
I believe it to be important and would appreciate any
debunking. Are these flashes birds?

I did comment before that they were probably reflections form the aluminium facades as they caught the sunlight, I even showed this was definately the case in at least some instances from video stills as you can see them out to the sides, but no-one was interested.
The crucial point is that there is no way of telling how far away the flashes are from the tower as the camera is looking straight on, people just assume they are coming form the core but if the aluminium is thrown out far enough it would be in sunlight.

Regarding the 911Eyewitness spire flashes visible in the North tower collapse...

Sure some of the outside flashes could have been aluminium. But there are dozens of internal flashes visible as well.

Given that numerous firemen described flashes going off below the impact level prior to the start of the collapse and compared them to controlled demolision charges, I don't see why we can't assume that the 911eyewitness spire clip flashes are simply a continuation of the detonations that the firemen testified about.

You sound like a complete fool Smith to ignore the firemen's testimony now that it is no longer under lock and key to keep the public ignorant of the crimes of 9/11.

You got a pretty good butt whippin' there Smith on your intentionally misleading debunking of the 911Eyewitness North tower top debris falling beside the tower instead of flying 600 feet. But it doesn't seem to phase you. All in a day's work I suppose.

How do you know the flashes were from within from that distance with a video that gives no depth perception? Do you have the 3D Imax version? Care to share?

Originally posted by Buffy
You got a pretty good butt whippin' there Smith on your intentionally misleading debunking of the 911Eyewitness North tower top debris falling beside the tower instead of flying 600 feet. But it doesn't seem to phase you. All in a day's work I suppose.

Not really, if you use those things in your head called eyes (I assume you're not blind - I apologise if you are) then you can follow the debris and see that it originates from the top, I did actually show this but I frankly got bored arguing with ignorant pricks. Sadly I'm not good enough to just let it go, but who cares - I need to amuse myself for 5 minutes so a daily slagging off session of people like you helps pass the time and reminds me that I am actually intellectually superior to a lot of people (though not more so than some others I admit).

Here is what 911eyewitness is trying to say (from his own site):



As you can see it does not some from the 'mid level' but from the top:



*Yawn*

It was a building collapse, not a fountain. You'll see what you want anyway, how the hell anyone can keep pratting on that the debris furthest out came from the midlevel is absurd, I find it astounding how any bipedal creature that classifies itself as a human being can have such a puny cerebral cortex, but there you go. Be careful, someone might try and dissect you for scientific study.

Just click on the 'Gripe/Idea' button on the top menu to report my abuse by the way.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by AgentSmith]

HALT!

Buffy's comments and insinuations were inappropriate. Please, let's leave it at that obvious fact and move on.

Buffy - as I said in my u2u - there was absolutely no need for any of the personal attacks and especially not the insinuation.

And now so was yours Agent - so we will leave this tit for tat just at that and move back to the topic and completely away from the name-calling and personal attacks.


[edit on 2-16-2006 by Valhall]

Personally, I've never had a problem with 911 being done by a govt element. There was the Reichstag, and Pearl Harbor, remember? THe govt can keep most anything a secret, only a few people need to be the perpetrators and they're sure not telling.

Think about this: The U.S. is by far the most heavily armed and monitored country in the world. Our military is ready to go within 60 seconds of being notified. It just isn't feasible that a group of 19 Arabs with no modern technology could get past our defenses, etc. At the very least the government allowed it. Remember, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, et al wrote about needing to go to war with the world and that they needed a Pearl Harbor type of attack - all about 1993. THe PNAC document was written BEFORE 911 (which is the document that contains that idea and alot of other statements that point to a smoking gun.)

-Forestlady

Originally posted by forestlady
Personally, I've never had a problem with 911 being done by a govt element. There was the Reichstag, and Pearl Harbor, remember? THe govt can keep most anything a secret, only a few people need to be the perpetrators and they're sure not telling.
-Forestlady

You may be interested in bsbray's thread here: Who did it?

Sorry if this has been covered recently...

But does anyone have a link to the movie? The torrent file linked before is bad

Smith you are your own best debunker.

Everyone who watches your posted clip can see the top debris fall close to the side of the tower while your arrow hovers in mid-air waiting for the ejected debris to arrive from the middle of the tower.

To ignore the top section heavy debris from the start of the collapse, clearly visible hitting the ground while the 600 foot mid-section ejection is still in mid-nonhorizontal arc from demolition explosives, is symbolic of your mind control programming.


Tell us again about how it was all just a gravity speed pancake into pyroclastic clouds of baking powder caused by burning office furniture.

It would make a funny bedtime story for children if it wasn't actually a black-op collateral damage sacrifice of 3,000 innocent civilians.

When are your handlers going to replace you with Agent Jones?


[edit on 23/2/06 by JAK]

Originally posted by Buffy
Everyone who watches your posted clip can see the top debris fall close to the side of the tower while your arrow hovers in mid-air waiting for the ejected debris to arrive from the middle of the tower.

BY 'everyone' I assume you mean yourself. Everyone who I have spoken to privately (including people who support the explosives theory) admit I am right. How come no-one else seems to be pursuing it? It's been pretty quiet up until now while you've been waiting for your warning to go away. No one is disputing some of the debris from the top fell close ot the tower, but the debris you see fall furthest away does come from the top. It's not complicated, is it?

[edit on 23/2/06 by JAK]

Enough of the personal attacks thank you.

Jak

hello im am a new member so please dont flame if wat i say has been answered before or seems stupid.my friend supports this theory of explosives being planted on the WTC buildings and it being staged by the government due to this video-video.google.com... which i havent watched cuz i have crappy internet(thanks mom)
he says that if the building fell perfectly straight down, the floors collapsed on top of each other and would have caused a slow down but from the video watched,it seemed it fell at freefall speed.i dont know much physics, i have some theories on y it cud accelerate to higher speeds but im not really sure of it.based on my readings on some of the stuff on this site, i feel that it wasnt staged and physics holds the answers and i would like some reasons to disprove him.dont worry i never say that the answers are my own but from a friend source.

Originally posted by TidalWave
he says that if the building fell perfectly straight down, the floors collapsed on top of each other and would have caused a slow down but from the video watched,it seemed it fell at freefall speed.

Why a "but" in there? Falling at free fall is indicative of there being no resistance, and Building 7 did fall at free fall, or freakishly close. What's more is the symmetry. That building fell right down upon itself flawlessly. A demo team couldn't have done better. Things like that don't occur naturally.

i dont know much physics, i have some theories on y it cud accelerate to higher speeds but im not really sure of it.based on my readings on some of the stuff on this site, i feel that it wasnt staged and physics holds the answers and i would like some reasons to disprove him.

Ok, so based on what you've read here, you think 9/11 happened just as we were told, but yet you're asking for things to disprove him on WTC7. So I take it you haven't come across any yet. Why are you so interested in disproving your friend, rather than trying to figure out what the truth is?

Here are some extremely short broadcast news clips from that day.

ABC-Demolition-Team (1:07 min)


ABC-Demolition-Infrastructure (0:12)


911-WTC-Lobby-Big-Explosion (0:20)


911-WTC-Police-Found-Explosives-Rick-Sanchez (1:04 min)


911-WTC-Reporter-Secondary-Explosions (0:20)


Discovery, Matthys Levy Co-author Why Buildings Fall Down (0:24)


911-WTC-Secondary-Explosions-Jeffrey-Beatty-CNN (0:10)

Originally posted by AgentSmith
BY 'everyone' I assume you mean yourself.

Well maybe everyone was the wrong choice of wording, surely there are a few around here that agree with you Smith...*cough* Howard *cough*

I don't think Buffy could have said that better, I was thinking pretty close to what she just typed as I read and examined your illustrations, its immediately obvious to me that there was debris ejected mid fall, all that didn't come from the top bro.

However, considering the evidence in the video, the whole debris ejection thing is small, its one of the less obvious things that I think people didn't/dont notice until it's pointed out.

All I gotta say is if infact the explosion sounds are NOT dubbed into the video, then this is the last piece of evidence I personally will need to go from 95% sure of an inside job to being 100% It's just getting ridiculous IMO the lengths that people are going to defend this blatant cover-up, or perhaps there are those that unfortunately really believe the official story and either dont have the resources or the balls to do some research.

It's just like I read somewhere in this post, short of an outwright confession by the perpatrators

Originally posted by AgentSmith
BY 'everyone' I assume you mean yourself.

Well maybe everyone was the wrong choice of wording, surely there are a few around here that agree with you Smith...*cough* Howard *cough*

I don't think Buffy could have said that better, I was thinking pretty close to what she just typed as I read and examined your illustrations, its immediately obvious to me that there was debris ejected mid fall, all that didn't come from the top bro.

However, considering the evidence in the video, the whole debris ejection thing is small, its one of the less obvious things that I think people didn't/don't notice until it's pointed out.

All I gotta say is if in-fact the explosion sounds are NOT dubbed into the video, then this is the last piece of evidence I personally will need to go from 95% sure of an inside job to being 100% It's just getting ridiculous IMO the lengths that people are going to defend this blatant cover-up, or perhaps there are those that unfortunately really believe the official story and either don't have the resources or the balls to do some research.

It's just like I read somewhere in this post, short of an outright confession by the perpetrators (which is absolutely laughable to even suggest) I'm really starting to think that there isn't anything proof enough to convince some.

Great find WCIP, this is definately a valued part of my collection now.

[edit on 3/1/2006 by JKersteJr]

Well that's fine but i don't see it myself, I really don't and I know some other people don't either, I say some because if you and some others do then it's not all. The only conclusions are that some of us are either stupid or programmed in some way (delibrately or not) to not see the 'truth' in this case. This isn't meant as sarcasm but it is the truth.